VIDEO: Mark Williams-Thomas- Madeleine Woke & Wandered or Police Investigation Evidence? with John Gaunt

Excellent video, thanks. 

Opinions, anyone can have them? 


No jemmied shutters, no evidence of an abductor, no time for said abductor either. 
Gerry & Kate say they know Madeleine did not walk out of the apartment and Eddie & Keela held more than an opinion and agree she didn't walk out either!

MayMuse wrote:Excellent video, thanks. 

Opinions, anyone can have them? 


No jemmied shutters, no evidence of an abductor, no time for said abductor either. 
Gerry & Kate say they know Madeleine did not walk out of the apartment and Eddie & Keela held more than an opinion and agree she didn't walk out either!

I  feel quite despondent as no one is challenging this rubbish - even John Gaunt whose profile is on this page, didn't really challenge in a meaningful way. I've been very upbeat that the tide is turning but I see this interview as a setback (or  a reality check). I voted for no cover up on the poll but it really is looking like a big stitch up now and I can't see anyone in the mainstream media being prepared to raise their head above the parapet.

What's_up_doc? wrote:

MayMuse wrote:Excellent video, thanks. 

Opinions, anyone can have them? 


No jemmied shutters, no evidence of an abductor, no time for said abductor either. 
Gerry & Kate say they know Madeleine did not walk out of the apartment and Eddie & Keela held more than an opinion and agree she didn't walk out either!

I  feel quite despondent as no one is challenging this rubbish - even John Gaunt whose profile is on this page, didn't really challenge in a meaningful way. I've been very upbeat that the tide is turning but I see this interview as a setback (or  a reality check). I voted for no cover up on the poll but it really is looking like a big stitch up now and I can't see anyone in the mainstream media being prepared to raise their head above the parapet.

I made the attempt in the best way I could with a very limited format...   but I agree and thats why I felt it was worthwhile to try.

HiDeHo wrote:

What's_up_doc? wrote:

MayMuse wrote:Excellent video, thanks. 

Opinions, anyone can have them? 


No jemmied shutters, no evidence of an abductor, no time for said abductor either. 
Gerry & Kate say they know Madeleine did not walk out of the apartment and Eddie & Keela held more than an opinion and agree she didn't walk out either!

I  feel quite despondent as no one is challenging this rubbish - even John Gaunt whose profile is on this page, didn't really challenge in a meaningful way. I've been very upbeat that the tide is turning but I see this interview as a setback (or  a reality check). I voted for no cover up on the poll but it really is looking like a big stitch up now and I can't see anyone in the mainstream media being prepared to raise their head above the parapet.

I made the attempt in the best way I could with a very limited format...   but I agree and thats why I felt it was worthwhile to try.

I hope it didn't sound like I was including you in that Hideho - I really appreciate your posts because they are so informative.  I was very disappointed with John Gaunt because he didn't make any attempt to challenge what was a very incoherent theory - as your captions show. Thanks for the film - I really do think it is worthwhile just feeling a bit frustrated today!

Mark Williams-Thomas Review 2009

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ongoing Investigation
After this period which we can characterise as the initial stage of the police ongoing
investigation – which also involved help from a number of British and International
police forces had a number of distinct characteristics. 

19
These included the use of “cadaver dogs” and information generated by forensic
evidence gathered at the scene of Madeleine’s disappearance. I will consider these
issues in turn.

So too by this stage the police should have developed a number of theories as to what
might have led to the disappearance of Madeleine, and it is clear from reading the
report prepared when the case was due to be closed by Inspector Joao Carlos that they
were considering three hypotheses during the ongoing investigation.

These were – in the descriptions used by Inspector Carlos:
• Abduction without homicide.
• Abduction followed by homicide.
• Accidental death and later hiding of the corpse.
It is clear from reading the police files that form the basis of this review that the
hypothesis that Madeleine had been accidentally killed, and her body hidden, took on a
greater significance when the police were under greater pressure, and after the use of
“Cadaver Dogs”.

Cadaver Dogs
Cadaver dogs are used by the police in England and Wales in a number of different
situations, such as in the search for missing people or homicide victims. The dogs are
trained to detect vestiges of human blood and the odour of corpses. The dogs were
brought over to Praia da Luz by Martin Grime, at the time a South Yorkshire Police
Officer, at the request of the Portuguese police between 1st to 8th August.

It is a moot point as to whether or not this time gap before using the dog team was too
great to have produced significant results. 

20
Searches were made by the dogs on the following areas: Mr Murat’s property;
Apartment 5a; Western and Eastern Beaches; and ten different vehicles. Dogs
positively indicated corpse odour inside apartment 5a; in the couple’s bedroom, in a
corner close to a wardrobe, in the living room, behind the sofa, in the area immediately
outside the flat; on two pieces of Kate’s clothing, and also on one piece of Madeline’s
clothing.

The cadaver dog also identified traces in a flower bed in a back yard close to apartment
5a and in various places related to a Renault Scenic car, which had been hired by the
McCanns over two weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance.

For example, the cadaver dog positively signalled a vehicle key, and another dog -
specially trained to identify blood, identified traces on the vehicle’s key, and the interior
of the Scenic’s boot.

These results undoubtedly influenced the police thinking to such an extent that
Inspector Carlos specifically maintained that it was after the dog searches that the
McCanns were made arguidos.

Even so, the positive results from these dog searches were not confirmed in relation to
any DNA evidence taken from apartment 5a, or from the McCann’s hire car.

Recommendation - The use of cadaver dogs should be very carefully considered by any future
senior investigating officer. Also when used very careful consideration should be given to relying solely
on their evidence.


DNA
Forensic tests were performed by the Forensic Science Service (FSS) in England and
Wales and their final results did not corroborate any of the positive signals given by the
dog searches, either in the apartment being rented by the McCanns, or in their hire car.
Indeed the statement given by the forensic scientist stated that:

In the objects recovered from the Scenic, there were around 15 blonde/fair hairs
similar to the reference hairs from SJM2, 4 and 5. However, as it was not possible
to do solid [definitive] or significant [forensically meaningful] tests it is not
possible for me to determine if, or not, these could have been from Madeleine
McCann.

Even so, the reliance by the police to use the evidence presented by the dogs was in
this case significant and damaging. It enabled the investigation to become focused on
the McCanns and thus ignoring all other possible lines of enquiry.

In short, the police gave far too much strength to the dog evidence and as a result it
now seems clear that they set out to establish a case against the McCanns. After all,
the use of dogs and the evidence that they provide is not “science” and is often a
matter of judgement and interpretation on the part of the dog handler. So too it
should also be remembered that the dog cannot be challenged and therefore presents a
significant breakdown in the evidence chain.

Another excellent video, HiDeHo. You got a lot of good points over.

What's_up_doc? wrote:

MayMuse wrote:Excellent video, thanks. 

Opinions, anyone can have them? 


No jemmied shutters, no evidence of an abductor, no time for said abductor either. 
Gerry & Kate say they know Madeleine did not walk out of the apartment and Eddie & Keela held more than an opinion and agree she didn't walk out either!

I  feel quite despondent as no one is challenging this rubbish - even John Gaunt whose profile is on this page, didn't really challenge in a meaningful way. I've been very upbeat that the tide is turning but I see this interview as a setback (or  a reality check). I voted for no cover up on the poll but it really is looking like a big stitch up now and I can't see anyone in the mainstream media being prepared to raise their head above the parapet.

If noone else is challenging then I will...

First of a set of graphics challenging his comments from the review...  Thanks to whatsupdoc for the inspiration    





[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Robert Black...yet again he doesn't say anything about any living suspects, just the dead ones!
S&A awoke Madeleine?? I thought they were deeply sleeping, so much so they had to be checked over and then didnt even wake when moved.
Ben's case solved?
Everyone entitled to their opinion, well thankyou for letting the British public know that Clarrie!

Great video HiDeHo, thankyou for all you do,x

Who else heard the first caller say "blood" before being interupted?
Mr Gaunt really doesn't speak very well does he, almost slurring his words, for a radio host!

Thanks for this Hi-de-ho.

I have re-tweeted. 

It needs transcribing - there are so many loopholes in MWT's statements.   So I am offering to do that later tonight if nobody else is already underway with a transcription.

RosieandSam wrote:Thanks for this Hi-de-ho.

I have re-tweeted. 

It needs transcribing - there are so many loopholes in MWT's statements.   So I am offering to do that later tonight if nobody else is already underway with a transcription.

That would be great RosieandSam...a few of those comments would be eligible for a response.  Thnk you for offering :)

Apologies if this is not the correct thread. Mod please feel free to move if so. I was just reviewing the Sky News reports from the morning of May 4th 07. At approx 10.30 a.m. a phone interview took place with a Luz resident, Mark McCarrick, in which he claims to have learned from some people at the Ocean Club that the door to the apartment was left "ajar" and that, therefore, the searchers were looking for a child who had wandered off. I wonder from whom he got this information? 
One of the earliest people on the scene was Amy Tierney  who said the following in her P.J. statement of May 6th

  "She confirms that, on the night of the disappearance she was on duty and immediately went to the bedroom to see if the girl was hiding. She saw that the shutter was raised and that the window was partially open. It was then that she began to look in the wardrobes to see if the girl was hiding.

The first idea that occurred to her was that the girl could have left by her own means, however after checking that the window was open and the shutter raised she asked the parents whether Madeleine's shoes were there, to which they replied that they were, these facts led her to think that Madeleine could have been taken by someone.

However there was a bed against the window, which could have enabled the girl to climb up onto it and then up to the window, the witness thinks it would not be possible as she would not be able to open the shutters and even if she had done so she would have fallen outside as the window is too high for a child of that age to be able to descend without falling.

In reply to the question asked, she said that the back door (porta das traseiras) that leads to the parking area was closed, but she doesn't know whether the front door (porta da frente) was locked as when she arrived both the parents and a female friend of theirs whose name she does not know, were there and that is why the door was open"
In a nutshell, Amy is claiming that if Madeleine left the apartment herself it had to have been via the bedroom window. (highly unlikely)

As I understand it, Amy then rang Lyndsay Johnston, who initiated the "lost child protocol" and, in turn, contacted John Hill. Given that the McCanns &co initially claimed the doors were locked, and John Hill and Lyndsay Johnston were allegedly told by Amy that the doors were closed, who from the ocean club could have told Mark McCarrick that a door was "ajar" by ten thirty the following morning and why would Hill persist in the view that Madeleine had escaped the apartment by herself? Something is off here. I suspect that Amy Tierney's evidence about the open window and closed doors was  fabricated after May 3/4th. This implies there was contact between the McC group and the nannies during that period.